Reflection

The Catholic Church under the leadership of Pope Francis is not only breaking the silence in relation to sex abuse and abusive relationships but the universal Church is also promoting and putting in place measures to prevent abuse from re-occurring. This united stand is not found in society at large, despite the problem of sexual abuse (and other types of abuse) being found in all sectors of society and institutions, including political parties, educational institutions, companies, sports clubs, night clubs, families, and across all cultures, socio-economic backgrounds, political regimes or religions (John Jay College Of Criminal Justice & Catholic Church, 2004; Oates et al, 2000; Martin & Silverstone, 2013).

To make the most of this historical opportunity that the Church has to contribute to create a world free from violence, the commitment to social impact is crucial. Our responsibility is not doing safeguarding, but to do safeguarding that has proven to work best to prevent and eliminate abuse in the Church and outside the Church, that is to say, doing safeguarding with social impact. Our work on policies, protocols, and training must eventually translate into the decrease of abuse and the establishment of safe environments and a consistent culture of protection. Safeguarding actions need to be tracked and evaluated in this regard.How can we do this? It must be informed by the science of safeguarding and the science of social impact[1].

Information on safeguarding actions, programs, and interventions that have yielded evidence of social impact is fortunately, already available, and much of it is open access. So, any citizen who has access to the Internet can get to know those programs and actions- the impact they have achieved, where, and how. This data can be found in scientific journals which deal with child abuse, violence against women, education research, social sciences, health research, child, and adolescent development, etc. What is more, there is already a compendium of such programs and actions recently published by the European Commission in the Report Achieving student well-being for all: educational contexts free of violence.This EC Report presents international programs and actions that address Violence Against Children (VAC), including child sexual abuse, indicating the 13 programs supported by available evidence of social impact as published in ranked scientific journals. The report also lists programs, some of which are quite popular -and expensive-, and for which the data published does not show positive impact. Those in charge of training should inform themselves on proven successful actions in safeguarding and share this knowledge with: a) those implementing child safeguarding actions and programs and, b) with all leaders of institutions who serve children and vulnerable adults.

This point simply means applying the same logic as in any other professional sector, such as in the health system. Physicians recommend and prescribe the treatment that has proven to be the best cure for the illness. No need for a “try and see” approach in safeguarding either. Doing otherwise perpetuates or even increases suffering of the most vulnerable ones. We know that suicide ideation is high among victims of sexual abuse and the numbers of victims who commit it is raising (Molnar, Berkman & Buka, 2001; Pampati, 2020). What is more, article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations General Assembly, 1948) makes clear that there is a human right to science, a human right to benefit from scientific advancements. This means that every child and every adult, without exception, is entitled to benefit from the science of safeguarding. We can add also in accordance with our values, that the poorer the people, only the best service should be provided.

It is important also to state that there are safeguarding actions, programs, policies, and protocols which seem to be doing good in populations in different parts of the world. There are highly committed individuals in all continents and contexts, who tirelessly dedicate their lives to creating safe environments in Church-based works for children and vulnerable adults. However, data has rarely been gathered to evidence the social impact of these actions. It is very important to start collecting impact data of those excellent works, that is, to assess their social impact. We are speaking of impact evaluation here. More and more congregations, governments, funding agencies, etc, are starting to require proof of social impact. This helps them to decide if they should continue to support such programs. This is good news as it means committing to supporting the best programs.

Impact evaluation is key, and getting it right is crucial. This is a place where questions need to be asked and guidelines offered since there is a growing industry also around impact evaluations. Companies and consultancies have appeared saying that they evaluate impact in safeguarding and some Church agencies employ such evaluators. Nonetheless, many of those companies have no background in social impact measurement research and usually fall into grave errors. One of them is confusing impact, transference,and dissemination. This error has been first noted, explained, and clarified by the leading scientist in the field of social impact: "While disseminationmeans to disseminate the knowledge created by research to citizens, companies and institutions, transferencerefers to the use of this knowledge by these different actors. However social impact refers to the actual improvements resulting from the use of this knowledge in relation to the goals motivating the research project (such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals)" (Flecha, 2022; Pulido et al, 2018). This differentiation is extremely helpful for those engaged in safeguarding.

If you measure the social impact of your training, actions/programs/interventions, and policies, make sure you do not use as indicators the number of times that you have given interviews in the press or on TV, the number of courses given, the enrollment rates in your workshops, the number of safeguarding diplomas conferred, etc. That is dissemination. Also, do not use as indicators of social impact the transference of programs to other countries, counting the number of actions transferred, the number of countries implementing an action transferred, the money dedicated to support safeguarding works in other countries, etc. All that is transference. You can transfer a safeguarding program to Church works in the poorest countries of the world, yet that does not mean that you are reducing abuse in those works. Same applies to training.

Social impact implies quantitative and qualitative evidence of elimination of abuse, creation of safe environments, and development of a new culture of protection because of those actions, programs, policies and/or training. This is what transforms lives, what heals victims, what protects the most vulnerable from victimization, etc.

Father Pedro Arrupe SJ, former Superior General of the Society of Jesus, used to say that he was afraid of us giving yesterday's answers to tomorrow's problems. Scientific research in the field of safeguarding sheds light on those most updated solutions with social impact. Likewise, the current science of social impact can help us in showing the profound transformations that are taking place every day around the world thanks to safeguarding actions, thus presenting a horizon full of light and hope for victims, for all of us, and for future generations.

References

Flecha, R. (2022).The Dialogic Society.Barcelona: Hipatia Press.

John Jay College Of Criminal Justice & Catholic Church. United States Conference Of Catholic Bishops. (2004) The nature and scope of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests and deacons in the United States,-2002: a research study conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, the City University of New York: for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. [Washington, D.C.: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, ©] [Pdf] Retrieved from the Library of Congress,https://www.loc.gov/item/2019667266/

Martin, E.K., & Silverstone, P.H. (2013) How much child sexual abuse is “below the surface,” and can we help adults identify it early? Front. Psychiatry 4:58. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2013.00058

Molnar, B., Berkman, L., & Buka, S. (2001). Psychopathology, childhood sexual abuse and other childhood adversities: Relative links to subsequent suicidal behaviour in the US. Psychological Medicine,31(6), 965-977. doi:10.1017/S0033291701004329

Oates, R. K., Jones, D. P., Denson, D., Sirotnak, A., Gary, N., & Krugman, R. D. (2000). Erroneous concerns about child sexual abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24 , 149-57.

Pampati, S., Lowry, R., Moreno, M.A., Rasberry, C.N., & Steiner, R.J. (2020). Having a Sexual Photo Shared Without Permission and Associated Health Risks: A Snapshot of Nonconsensual Sexting. JAMA Pediatr. 2020;174(6):618–619. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.0028

Pulido, C.M., Redondo-Sama, G., Sordé-Martí, T., & Flecha, R. (2018) Social impact in social media: A new method to evaluate the social impact of research. PLoS ONE 13(8): e0203117. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203117

United Nations General Assembly. (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). New York: United Nations General Assembly.

[1] This is indispensable and should be grounded in the values of Catholic social teaching, matched with theological and spiritual reflection.